consortium claim in Massachusetts

2024In Diaz, 364 Mass. at 162 n.29, which was decided while the Massachusetts Rules of Civil Procedure were under consideration but before the rules were adopted, the Supreme Judicial Court stated that a defendant's right to insist that a consortium claim be joined with the underlying negligence action "should be very clear under Rule 19 ('Joinder of Persons Needed for Just Adjudication') of our new Rules of Civil Procedure." Consistent with that admonition, we conclude that rule 19 (a) conferred on 5 Draper the right to request that the plaintiffs' consortium claims be joined with the underlying

2024See id. ("in appealing circumstances the consortium claim might be held to be lost if not asserted by the time the negligence action is tried").

1990Co., 406 Mass. 478, 480 (1990), it is an independent injury, explicitly included in the policy coverage through the policy’s definition of bodily injury.

1990The judge did not charge the jury on the matter but reserved it for decision by himself in the light of the jury’s findings in their special verdicts. 8 In Corrigan v. General Electric Co., 406 Mass. 478 (1990) (4-2 decision), a majority of the court ruled that the “independence” of the consortium claim need not be absolute across the board.

1990In Ferriter v. Daniel O’Connell’s Sons, 381 Mass. 507 (1980), where a child’s claim for loss of parental society was first recognized, the court, as a matter of sound administration and fairness, declared that no child’s claim would be entertained if a spouse’s consortium claim arising from the same incident was barred by the running of limitations before September 9, 1980, the date of the Ferriter opinion. 381 Mass. at 516-517 n.12.

1990Under the doctrine of Ferriter v. Daniel O’Connell’s Sons, Inc., 381 Mass. 507, 509, 516, 530 (1980) , the fact of Marques’ right to, and recovery of, this compensation did not exclude a consortium claim by Marques’ near relatives against the employer.

2006Hutlin, 40 Mass.App.Ct. at 697-98 (noting the success of the wife’s consortium claim, by contrast, would not necessarily have been defeated because of her husband’s comparative negligence).

1997Id.

2024Cf. Santagate, 64 Mass. App. Ct. at 333 (equitable defense of laches available where "there has been unjustified, unreasonable, and prejudicial delay 12 in raising a claim").

1996See, e.g., Morgan v. Lalumiere, 22 Mass. App. Ct. 262 (1986).

1992L. c. 152, § 24, in Russell v. Boston Wyman, Inc., 410 Mass. 1005, 1006 (1991). 14 In that case, a financially independent husband whose wife was injured at work sought to bring a loss of consortium claim, arguing, as the St.

1990Cambridge points to a case decided many years ago, Slavinsky v. National Bottling Torah Co., 267 Mass. 319, 322 (1929), which indicated that, with compensation in force, a parent was barred in an action against the employer for loss of her child’s services due to injury by negligence of a fellow employee in the course of the employment.

1990The consortium claim had status independent of any claim by the husband for the physical injury, see, e.g., Feltch v. General Rental Co., 383 Mass. 603, 606-610 (1981).

1990Authy., 405 Mass. 439, 440 [1989]), had run on the consortium claim several years before the action was filed on June 7, 1984.

1980The employer also cites Thibeault v. Poole, 283 Mass. 480, 486 (1933).

1980The employer also cites Thibeault v. Poole, 283 Mass. 480, 486 (1933).

1973And as mentioned in the dissenting opinion in the Lombardo case, 359 Mass. 529, 532, 539 , (1971), counsel may well consider it self-defeating to urge a consortium claim when the physical injury is less than serious. 27 The joinder is now allowed by G.

1973We would leave open the possibility that in appealing circumstances the consortium claim might be held to be lost if not asserted by the time the negligence action is tried. 31 The trend is described in Prosser, supra, § 125, at pp. 894-896. 32 See the summary with citation of the cases in the dissenting opinion in the Lombardo case, 359 Mass. 529, 534-535 (1971).

1973See also the Deems case, where the consortium rights are viewed as owned by the marriage entity (i.e. jointly by husband and wife) and evidently must be asserted in the negligence action. 247 Md. at 108-109, 115 .